CIVIC BREEZE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIX, Issue 135, 10 June 1938, Page 14

CIVIC BREEZE.

WHAT'S A CAUCUS ?

LABOUR CHARGES. DEPUTY-MAYORALTY ISSUE. PREVIOUS MEETING HEED. What is a caucus? This question last night became the first real bono of contention atnong the members of Auckland's new City Council—and they hit deeply into it. The civic "breeze" started with the receipt ( ,f the expression by the Auckland branch of the National Council of Women of regret and dissatisfaction that Miss Ellen Melville, who Ims given — _ ' years of consecutive service to the council, should have boon "passed over'' in connection with the appointment of a deputy-Mayor. Allegations that this position, together with the question of chairmen of committees, had been first dealt with by a caucus gathering of the non-Labour majority led to a debate that was bitter at times. There was even division of opinion among some of the members who had been elected on the Citizen's ticket. Mr. Sayegh's Hint. After the Mayor. Sir Finest Davis, had moved that the communication from the women's organisation should be received and its protest noted. Mr. J. Savegh said the writers of the letter had his deepest sympathy, but he thought it should he pointed out to them that possibly the matter had been dealt with by a caucus of the majority on the council. He recalled how not long a<ro the people of Auckland had been tohf what a detrimental thing caucus rule was supposed to be.

Mr. A. St. Clair Brown

Mr. Sayegh had to have his little joke, declared Mr. W. R. Fee. He denied that the council's non-Labour majority had ever met in caucus. The nomination of the deputy-Mayor had been the result of the exercising by the Mayor of his proper privilege.

To Mr. J. J. Sullivan the whole affair looked like a family quarrel, but he contended that there must have been some consensus or agreement beforehand about the deputy-Mayoralty. It must have emanated from some informal meeting which had "the nasty name— for so it is. after all—of caucus rule."

Using also the expression "this nnliolv caucus." Mr. Sullivan mentioned the offer of chairmanships of committees to Labour members. He understood it had been considered by the Citizen's candidates that this offer should he made, and they must have had a meeting to decide that.

Mr. A. St. Clair Brown said he and every other man who was on the Citizen's "ticket" knew there "was a meeting. They had Tnet in the morning, and the "gentlemen Q f the opposition" had met in the afternoon of the same day. Mr. Brown added: '"So far as yon can call that a caucus, it was a caucus." Mr. Sullivan: Hear, hear! Mayor's Prerogative. Mr. Brown added that the question of the deputy-Mayoralty was discussed at the morning meeting, and it was made perfectly clear to Miss Melville that a man was wanted for the position. There may have been an informal gathering, countered Mr. H. P. Burton, but there was no caucus meeting. Mr. J. L. Coakley said both the Citizen's and Labour* members had been invited to meet by the Mayor. It was a matter of the Mayor's* prerogative right from the beginning. Mr. P. Carr: the two parties conferred with the Mayor, but not at the same time. The first meetina was definitely a caucus, held with the Labour members not present, and we were asked to concur with certain conclusions. Voices: That's not correct.

The offer of chairmanships had been a political move, affirmed Mr. R. Ann strong.

"That is absolutely absurd." said Sir Krnj»st. and he added later. "T dcfinitelv deny that it was a caucus meeting. f don't propose to be inveigled intoanv argument on this matter." There had been no other nominations for deputv-Mayor at the Council meeting on Mav 15). and the Mayor had moved that Sir George Richardson should he elected. The letter was received.